NEWS SOURCE: John Garrison
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Oct. 3 (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) — According to tax expert John C. Garrison: Like a reflex reaction, it seems natural for people quickly to associate our dreaded income tax with the I.R.S. But a new book by Garrison seeks to turn this focus instead on Congress and the Democratic Party. It is Congress, after all, with Democrats as originators and chief defenders of the system, who since 1913 are responsible for whatever is wrong or dreadful with our current form of income tax since it was Congress, with Democrats leading the charge, who in 1913 created our income tax in the form it stands today.
Leaders bear ultimate responsibility. That is why the Democratic Party, as the leading and unyielding defenders, the obstructionists of reform and the originators and chief political power that sustains and is behind our dreadful income tax today are above all to blame for the persistence in our midst of this most corrupt and inhumane system.
In his new book, “The New Income Tax Scandal: How Congress Hijacked the Sixteenth Amendment,” John C. Garrison, who has served honorably on the legal staff of a major law enforcement agency, and who has been active for over two decades in tax history research and tax reform activism, has delved into the history of those devious maneuvers in Congress that led to the establishment of our modern income tax system, fearlessly revealing in his book the legislative corruption that went into the system at its inception and, in the end, proposing a viable and exciting alternative.
If you think our elitist, self-serving Congress today does what it wants without regard to citizens’ well-being, wait until you learn from Garrison what unscrupulous Democrats in Congress did when they began our modern income tax in 1913 under the Democratic administration of Woodrow Wilson. For the first time, the disgusting inhumanity and corruption in our income tax-the real reason why this tax is so universally hated-is here clearly, methodically, and with professional competence, eloquence and skill revealed by John Garrison.
Included in the shocking detail are the following events which Garrison documents:
* In 1913, under the Democratic administration of Woodrow Wilson, and with a trusting public caught up in the exciting news of a newly-ratified 16th (or Income Tax) Amendment of that year, Congressional Democrats, in tax legislation supposedly based on the new Amendment, managed quietly and inappropriately amid the public excitement to convert the income tax from the excise tax it had been until then to the direct tax it is now through an abuse of Congressional power under the new Amendment. The Amendment had passed with wide popular support that arose from a promise made by Congressional Democrats that the income tax would be and remain a tax only for the “idle rich” who lived off the gain from their investments. According to the Democrats, the working class, seen as already too encumbered with consumption taxes, was to be spared from this burden. This was big news in 1913.
* While the 1913 error of Congress was indirectly confirmed as such three years after the fact in the 1916 rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific (240 U.S. 1) and Stanton v. Baltic Mining (240 U.S. 103), Congress was not compelled in these cases to correct itself since the High Court here did not directly consider, or specifically discuss, or bring to public attention an issue of whether Congress had committed an error in its act of 1913. Instead, the Court simply disposed of these cases merely and only by correcting litigant misconceptions over the true intent of the 16th Amendment. With Congress not pressured by these rulings, and with no widespread public suspicion or displeasure with the system existing at the time due to the tax being then applied only to a minority rich class (for whom alone Democrats in Congress had promised and said it was intended), it became convenient for Congress-following the old but flawed adage that what people don’t know won’t hurt them-to leave quietly in the system the inherent corruption as it was and as it is to this day. This also left an unsuspecting public largely unaware of the huge financial loss the Congressional abuse of 1913 would cause U.S. workers in later decades. This happened when, in a delayed “bait and switch” trick, the tax was turned from its original intent promised by Democrats as a tax solely for the rich to a tax applied on American workers en masse under the Democratic administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It is here where the big Democratic lie emerged and the “hidden” problem of the income tax kicked in for the first time with a working public deeply unaware this had happened, as it is true also to this day.
* In his book, “The Fair Tax,” Democratic Senator Bill Bradley admits these events under the Democratic administration of Roosevelt when he said that under Roosevelt, “the federal income tax was changed from a ‘class tax,’ applicable only to the most well-off, into a ‘mass tax'” (p. 80).
* Even though the U.S. Supreme Court had already affirmed the property nature of labor in its 1884 decision in Butchers’ Union v. Crescent City, calling labor “the most sacred and inviolable” form of property (111 U.S. 757)-more recently the same was said of the mere “right to work” itself in Greene v. McElroy (1959)-Congressional Democrats, through their legislative abuse of 1913, callously and brutally stripped American workers in effect of their constitutional right to claim either their labor or their right to work as their “income-producing property” so as to deprive the workers inhumanely of their legal right to deduct the costs of their personal labor (the skilled and intelligent human energy and time workers sell to employers). These deductible costs included expenditures for such living necessities as food, shelter and proper health maintenance.
* To keep the U.S. tax system from suddenly collapsing in 1978 and to cover up the historic misdeed of Congressional Democrats and their corrupt inhumanity in the income tax, the U.S. Tax Court in the case of Reading vs. Commissioner was forced to deny that human labor is property, defining such labor as mere “behavior performed by human beings in exchange for compensation” (70 T.C. 733) but failing to cite relevant authority to justify this bizarre, arbitrary and legally fictitious definition or to explain the existence of those long-established authorities that clearly and most directly contradict this definition.
* When Garrison made this discovery and filed without attorney several cases in federal court (beginning in 1990) challenging this corruption in the system-a corruption of Democratic origin that is so profound, incredible and inhumane that it places the total life-sustenance of every working taxpayer (what workers are entitled to keep of their hard-earned pay) completely under the mercy and grace of Congress-he was shocked to find that the evidence he put forth in the form of legal precedents affirming a worker’s labor to be income-producing property was being systematically suppressed by federal judges who then used stonewalling tactics to suppress Garrison’s strenuous objections. Garrison’s question was, “If the tax system is so legitimate, why is it that federal judges feel they have to step in with lawless tactics to help the U.S. Justice Department defend the system against my arguments and evidence, which neither the courts nor the I.R.S. could refute-only evade or suppress?” Repeated and identical experiences of this nature in three separate federal jurisdictions led Garrison to conclude that there was something terribly wrong being covered up by the system and that the federal courts were in on it.
* In the Garrison cases, federal judges were forced to obstruct justice not only through the suppression of evidence and the deprivation of Garrison’s right to due process-with two federal judges in Tallahassee, Florida, Senior Judge William Stafford and Magistrate Judge William Sherrill, Jr., acting in concert to do this-but through a practice of “judicial activism” that included casuistry, overt lies and deception as the only way these judges had to keep the system from suddenly collapsing and publicly exposing the historic, insidious and inhumane act of Democrats in Congress.
* This, unfortunately, is not a fanciful “conspiracy theory.” These are real life events for which there is already plenty of hard evidence readily available in the public domain for anyone to verify.
* In his remarkably revealing, fearless and explosive book, Garrison proposes a hybrid tax system as the most equitable, viable and constructive solution to the problem he addresses.
JOHN C. GARRISON serves as a specialist staff legal assistant in a civil service career in the area of rulemaking and administrative law. In a private and separate effort, he has been engaged in the study of federal tax history and law and in tax reform activism for over two decades.
To contact the author or for more detail on his book, visit www.johncgarrison.com.
BOOK INFORMATION:
Title: The New Income Tax Scandal: How Congress Hijacked the Sixteenth Amendment
Author: John C. Garrison
Publisher: Xlibris Corp.
Pages: 133
ISBN: 1-4134-9544-3
Year: 2005
News issued by: John Garrison
# # #
Original Story ID: (2057) :: 2006-10-1003-001
Original Keywords: John Garrison, tax reformer, historian, The New Income Tax Scandal: How Congress Hijacked the Sixteenth Amendment, ISBN 1-4134-9544-3, Xlibris Corp John Garrison
NEWS SOURCE: John Garrison | Published: 2006-10-03 14:47:00
IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR ARCHIVAL CONTENT ABOVE: The above archival press release content was issued on behalf of the noted "news source" who provided the content (text and image[s]) and is solely responsible for its accuracy. Links may not work if very old; use such with caution. Send2Press does not represent the "news source" in any capacity. For questions about this content contact the company/person mentioned directly. To report fraud or illegal material, or DMCA complaints, please contact Send2Press via our main site (any such complaints must be made in writing, not by phone).
